Play Nice Random Chat Thread VII

[DuckYeah]

But really why should they. Most have their own stuff to worry about.

Thats a fairly selfish statement. Everyone has their own shit to worry about, doesn’t mean we should have been sucked in by this “division” shit.

 

[Heaps of fun]

Thats a fairly selfish statement. Everyone has their own s**t to worry about, doesn’t mean we should have been sucked in by this “division” s**t.

That's what politics is though. You ask for people's patronage and in exchange they expect you to act in their best interest. The majority of people saw that there would be nothing to gain for them by voting yes so they didn't.

The idea that politics is a way to right wrongs and do what's ethically right is a fairly new one and it looks like YMMV.

 

[Masked Avenger]

That's what politics is though. You ask for people's patronage and in exchange they expect you to act in their best interest. The majority of people saw that there would be nothing to gain for them by voting yes so they didn't.

The idea that politics is a way to right wrongs and do what's ethically right is a fairly new one and it looks like YMMV.

Why did people vote for same sex marriage then HOF?

There was nothing to gain for the exceeding majority of Australians who voted yes but they still did. It was squarely about fairness. It's not a new concept.

 

[koshari]

Thats a fairly selfish statement. Everyone has their own s**t to worry about, doesn’t mean we should have been sucked in by this “division” s**t.

Yea it is, its also honest, charity begins at home, i got my dad and wifes parents who are elderly that require assistance and various other things to worry about.

You think i could give 2 hoots if the government makes up another committee?? iam old enough the remember when they had one before with ATSIC, in the end it was overrun with cronyism and had to be disbanded. and it doesn't take an expensive divisive referendum where i have to give up an hour of my time to trot off the a voting center 15kms away to vote on it.

maybe there are people who mean well and good on them, but practically speaking i cant see how anything that should be implemented be done so without another layer of bureaucrats.

 

[Heaps of fun]

Why did people vote for same sex marriage then HOF?

There was nothing to gain for the exceeding majority of Australians who voted yes but they still did. It was squarely about fairness. It's not a new concept.

That's an issue that doesn't affect most people.

 

[big_e]

Why did people vote for same sex marriage then HOF?

There was nothing to gain for the exceeding majority of Australians who voted yes but they still did. It was squarely about fairness. It's not a new concept.

Because it was a very simple concept to understand, and there was often a personal link - it means that Steve from accounts can get married to his partner, Warren. And that's it.

In the absence of any detail about what the Voice is and how it works and what it does and where it's limits would be, it was very easy to come up with a hundred reasons to vote no.

I think providing details - how many delegates, how often are the elections, where does it sit, what happens to the representations to Parliament, etc - would have given people at least a rough understanding of how it would have worked.

 

[DuckYeah]

Because it was a very simple concept to understand, and there was often a personal link - it means that Steve from accounts can get married to his partner, Warren. And that's it.

In the absence of any detail about what the Voice is and how it works and what it does and where it's limits would be, it was very easy to come up with a hundred reasons to vote no.

I think providing details - how many delegates, how often are the elections, where does it sit, what happens to the representations to Parliament, etc - would have given people at least a rough understanding of how it would have worked.

Its all over red rover but all those questions were simply irrelevant in the key question asked at the referendum. If you were looking for a reason to vote no, you could find one. Whether it was disinformation or built on identity politics or fear or far right ideology. You could find one. No doubt about it

 

[ferball]

Add Roger Cook and his feck up to the list of reasons why this failed as well:

How this banal concrete driveway became emblematic of WA's unique debate on the Voice

Despite having little to do with the Voice, the blowing up of ancient rock shelters and a bungled attempt to preserve Aboriginal heritage are the issues shaping the referendum debate in WA.

www.abc.net.au

If there was a mechanism in place where that real estate agent could talk to the local blackfellas about what he wanted to do on what he thinks is his own land (but technically isn't and never has been while WA and Australia exist - because the Crown grants an entitlement to use of the land but not ownership of the actual land including its mineral resources and water resources passing thru it, I would have thought an estate agent would know that) then they might have had a negotiated solution.

 

[DocSholl]

Its all over red rover but all those questions were simply irrelevant in the key question asked at the referendum. If you were looking for a reason to vote no, you could find one. Whether it was disinformation or built on identity politics or fear or far right ideology. You could find one. No doubt about it

Pretty much this. If every stated reason for opposition to the voice was solved for, people would have still found other reasons to vote no.

 

[Only Forwards]

Why did people vote for same sex marriage then HOF?

That's an issue that doesn't affect most people.

Because it was a very simple concept to understand, and there was often a personal link - it means that Steve from accounts can get married to his partner, Warren. And that's it.

And there’s also the fact that people didn’t actually vote.

A quarter of the voting population couldn’t give a f*** about it.

If we could amend to constitution in the same way i reckon the turn out would have been even less for the voice than it was for the plebiscite.

Australia are laid back to the point of apathy on a lot of issues. I’d happily wager that people only gave any interest at all to the voice because they were forced to vote. You take out those that simply did not care and the outcome probably changes.

 

[B4Bear]

...but that's how every power in the constitution works; to take any one of a multitude of examples, the constitution provides the commonwealth with a defence power, which the parliament then used to enact legislation - or put another way, the Defence Act 1909 wasn't put forward at the moment of Federation.

Exactly this.

The inability of people to understand basic civics is depressing.

 

[Only Forwards]

The inability of people to understand basic civics is depressing.

The fact that we had a political party encouraging ignorance, if you don’t know vote no, is probably the saddest indictment of the political machine in Australia.

We want our people stupid.

 

[DuckYeah]

The fact that we had a political party encouraging ignorance, if you don’t know vote no, is probably the saddest indictment of the political machine in Australia.

We want our people stupid.

Beyond dumb. Whoever was organising the Yes campaign was naive to the massive onslaught of propaganda. Either they were too comfortable during early polling records or they weren’t briefed accordingly on how to combat misinformation. Thats when it spun out of control.

Spud dutton might run around thinking he won something but unfortunately all his blue chip electorates he needs to win back literally went against him.

 

[big_e]

Its all over red rover but all those questions were simply irrelevant in the key question asked at the referendum. If you were looking for a reason to vote no, you could find one. Whether it was disinformation or built on identity politics or fear or far right ideology. You could find one. No doubt about it

I don't think 60% of Australian people are ignorant, racists, dickheads, etc.

At the start of the year, polls were in favour of the Voice. And yeah, most of that support was soft, but it proves people aren't heartless.

But refusing to provide any details left the door wide open for the fear campaign. It left too many questions unanswered, and it was very easy for those people who were a soft sox months ago to vote no.

 

[Chadwiko]

You think i could give 2 hoots if the government makes up another committee??

If this is how you feel, then logic dictates you vote 'yes'

"I don't care + it doesn't affect me"

Voting 'Yes' means nothing to you, but means heaps to those who want it.
Voting 'No' means nothing to you, but penalises those who want it.

 

[DuckYeah]

I don't think 60% of Australian people are ignorant, racists, dickheads, etc.

At the start of the year, polls were in favour of the Voice. And yeah, most of that support was soft, but it proves people aren't heartless.

But refusing to provide any details left the door wide open for the fear campaign. It left too many questions unanswered, and it was very easy for those people who were a soft sox months ago to vote no.

Whatever comes from this is where the votes for yes originated from and where they went is an interesting social conundrum. Im Gellibrand and for as long as I can remember over the last 15 years, we have always been Blue Collar, we look after one another, region. And that result hasn’t changed.

Is there higher association of “guilt” with better off people? And lower socio economic groups think “**** that im poor too”?

 

[rippersnipper]

Whatever comes from this is where the votes for yes originated from and where they went is an interesting social conundrum. Im Gellibrand and for as long as I can remember over the last 15 years, we have always been Blue Collar, we look after one another, region. And that result hasn’t changed.

Is there higher association of “guilt” with better off people? And lower socio economic groups think “* that im poor too”?

Is it guilt to want for others what you have yourself? Surely that's just being a decent person?

 

[koshari]

If this is how you feel, then logic dictates you vote 'yes'

"I don't care + it doesn't affect me"

Voting 'Yes' means nothing to you, but means heaps to those who want it.
Voting 'No' means nothing to you, but penalises those who want it.

the fact i care little about it doesn't trump my opinion of the proposal.

Do i think that a different layer of bureaucracy would make any practical difference, personally no so the logical vote is no. weather i care is moot in a logical argument, its if i think that the actual proposal would make a difference, and like i said, i don't. others have a differing opinion and like i said earlier i have little doubt many of these peoples heart is in the right place, i simply don't believe there would be any more of the suggested benefits than without.

 

[danj]

I don't think 60% of Australian people are ignorant, racists, dickheads, etc.

At the start of the year, polls were in favour of the Voice. And yeah, most of that support was soft, but it proves people aren't heartless.

But refusing to provide any details left the door wide open for the fear campaign. It left too many questions unanswered, and it was very easy for those people who were a soft sox months ago to vote no.

Australia is no more and no less racist today than it was on Friday.

The difference now is that by one interpretation of one measure we now have an indicative figure of how racist we are.

Although IMO it’s probably more indicative of the ignorance in our community on this issue

 

[archereleven]

If this is how you feel, then logic dictates you vote 'yes'

"I don't care + it doesn't affect me"

Voting 'Yes' means nothing to you, but means heaps to those who want it.
Voting 'No' means nothing to you, but penalises those who want it.

Who wanted it?

Inner city people and a few blackfullas from a ridiculous poll spouting 80% support?

My theory on why the voice failed is that it was proposed during a time of high inflation, 12 mortgage rises, rents going through the roof, food rising weekly, sky high energy prices, $2+ fuel etc.

Basically, low to middle income earners didn't give a flying ****...

On SM-G991B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Chadwiko]

Basically, low to middle income earners didn't give a flying *...

There's a big difference between 'I don't care' and 'I am actively choosing to vote against something that doesn't affect me'.

 

[B4Bear]

Who wanted it?

Inner city people and a few blackfullas from a ridiculous poll spouting 80% support?

My theory on why the voice failed is that it was proposed during a time of high inflation, 12 mortgage rises, rents going through the roof, food rising weekly, sky high energy prices, $2+ fuel etc.

Basically, low to middle income earners didn't give a flying *...

On SM-G991B using BigFooty.com mobile app

Except it was proposed years ago, and under the previous government at that.

This was an act of opportunism by Dutton. He could have gone down in history as a statesman on this issue.

‘’Instead he will be remembered as a **** sucking ****wit who will be hung on his own petard. There is a generation of young voters who will never forgive him for what he did.

 

[danj]

Who wanted it?

Inner city people and a few blackfullas from a ridiculous poll spouting 80% support?

My theory on why the voice failed is that it was proposed during a time of high inflation, 12 mortgage rises, rents going through the roof, food rising weekly, sky high energy prices, $2+ fuel etc.

Basically, low to middle income earners didn't give a flying *...

On SM-G991B using BigFooty.com mobile app

The Voice failed on two major fronts:
1/ it did not have bipartisan support in federal parliament and therefore was highly likely to fail

2/ the No campaign smashed Yes with their propaganda, for example at the end of the official No Pamphlet they listed 3 different websites each pushing a different reason why you should vote no, the Yes Pamphlet had no links to any social media, so the average punter had to search for yes or they could simply click on multiple reasons to vote No

 

[DuckYeah]

Is it guilt to want for others what you have yourself? Surely that's just being a decent person?

Im a first Gen Australian mate and I was never taught Indigenous history during my schooling years through primary or secondary. I grew up with a couple of Indigenous mates, and it never made any sense to me until I explored Indigenous history through the Museum of Melbourne. I had no ****ing idea. I walked in as a naive bloke who had his own families experiences of war and fascism but I could not fathom how that history was real. I acknowledge First Nations people even if I still dont really understand.

I dont have guilt. I have a sincere acknowledgment of Indigenous peoples.

I think the people who have benefited on massive wealth have guilt .

A vote for yes was a small thing I could have done which never impacted me on any level

 

[DuckYeah]

One more thing. Australia is a racist country. There is no doubt in my mind. I would have to brush the wog stuff more times than I could remember. I would get into fights for being a wog. I couldn’t imagine what it was like for black fullas if I grew up with being mocked for what was in my lunch box. Im guilty of being racist too.. Australians are racist. No doubt in my mind